The 2012 election was an open door for the GOP to lead America back to its roots in faith and morality, and the Republicans were AWOL, says Dr. James Dobson, founder of Family Talk and a brand new political outreach arm called Family Talk Action.
“I waited throughout the campaign for Mitt Romney to declare himself, to at least identify with the moral issues that are before us. He would not touch them,” Dobson said on a two-part radio program in which Penny Nance, head of Concerned Women for America, joined.
Dobson, whose advice about parenting, child-rearing, marriage and faith has guided millions of Americans and whose counsel on family matters has been sought by presidents, used two programs on his regular radio program, “Dr. James Dobson’s Family Talk” that were sponsored by his political action branch to comment on the re-election of Barack Obama.
He noted he and a handful of other conservative leaders, including Tony Perkins of Family Research Council, Gary Bauer and Gen. William Boykin, had met with the GOP candidate to encourage him to address social issues important to Christians across the nation.
“We begged him to deal with eight issues. We listed first the sanctity of life, marriage, religious life, ‘Don’t Ask,’ ENDA, on it went,” Dobson said. “We said we really are not here to jump on you, but evangelicals are not excited about your candidacy, not energized. … You could connect if you’ll even mention these things.
“He nodded and he smiled and he was gracious as he always is, and he went out and was silent,” Dobson said.
Dr. Dobson goes on to talk about how the Democrats have shifted on Abortion, Israel and many other topics. I here at this blog wrote about that little uprising myself. I have noticed one thing myself here; that Conservatives are saying that the keeping of the social platform in the Republican Party is going to be death knell for the Conservative movement.
I have one answer to that little idiotic notion — try winning elections without us folks. Fiscal conservatism is great, but without God, the Republican Party, much less the conservative movement will never survive. Again, what good is telling people that rights come, not from the Government — but from God, if you are not willing to stand for that God? It makes no sense and it will never work.
Mitt Romney’s downfall might have very well been his refusal to get tough on social issues. There is also too: Mitt Romney was a Mormon and quite frankly, the rest of the Christian world does not consider Mormonism to be true Christianity. This stance in the evangelical Christian circles is softening a bit. However, in the fundamentalist Christian circles it is very strong, I know this to true fact myself.
I also would like to make the following observation: It is not lost on me why the Conservative movement is moving away from the social conservative side of things. This is left-overs from the Neoconservative, Jewish-controlled, GOP of the George W. Bush-era. It is well-known, that according some of the staffers that worked in the Bush White House that most Conservative Christians were seen by the Bush White House as useful idiots. This could be why God allowed America to be attacked on 9/11. I mean, the Lord could have said, “Forsake me, eh? Well, how do you like this?” and we were hit. I am just speculating. But it does make sense to me.
In contrast, the old school, Paleoconservatives are mostly known to be devote Christians who do take the Word of God; that is the Bible, literally. This is unlike President Bush, who admitted in a exit interview, that he did not take the Bible literally. You notice that President Bush did not admit that, until he was safely away from every being reelected.
In Closing: If the GOP continues down this path and rejects social Conservatism. It will go the way of the Whig Party. Because social Conservatives will not back a candidate that is not interested in being tough on social issues. It is just that simple. I do not believe that they will start their own political party; that has been tried before and failed. I simply believe that the conservative Christians will stay home.
This is something that the Republican Party and we as Conservative Americans cannot afford.
I do not make a habit of linking to this Anti-Semite rag very often; but usually when I do it is to show just what kind of anti-Israeli bile that comes from that place. Despite the cleaning up of the image of this magazine; the same old Anti-Jewish and Anti-Israel bile continues to spew forth out that magazine.
I am, of course, referring to very poorly named “The American Conservative” which was formed by someone that I somewhat respect, except when it comes to this subject and World War II. Anyhow, one of the founders of the magazine, a one Scott McConnell explains that while he likes Israel’s people, he detests that American actually respects Israel and its right to exist. I will quote the parts that I feel are worth noting:
Honestly, anyone who has written or spoken in public about the Israel-Palestine question is subject to this, whether openly or behind their back. It is a stark charge, often used to insinuate anti-Semitism. But rather than being simply defensive, it might be helpful to explore one’s feelings more deeply. I’ve been to Israel twice, have met dozens of Israelis who were outstanding in terms of wisdom, vision, compassion, eloquence. There are several I know better who I’d count as among the most impressive people of my acquaintance.
Israel in a general sense has a great deal going for it: its science and medicine are first rate, and it produces many great scholars. All things being equal, it would probably rank high on my list of favorite countries — the way I feel about Switzerland perhaps or Spain — a place where I would happily spend a year, root for their teams when playing countries I don’t particularly care for, etc.
But of course all things aren’t equal. As an American, one is never asked simply to like or respect Israel as a foreign country — one is asked to more or less worship the place.
[….]
Netanyahu, a rabid ethnic nationalist who has done everything he could to squelch the Oslo peace process, and whose real views about America are aptly summarized by his quote “America is a thing you can move very easily” — a bit of candor caught off the record when Netanyahu was speaking to some right-wing Israeli settlers — is treated quite literally like royalty on Capitol Hill and in American newsrooms. Congress grants him 30 standing ovations. David Gregory refers to him as “leader of the Jewish people.” This “special relationship,” with all that it implies about my country, its relationship to the Middle East and the entire world, and its ability to look sensibly after its own affairs, I genuinely do detest.
First off, let me point out that Scott here did something that is common among the Anti-Semite crowd; he accused America of being Israel’s puppet. UPDATE: Yes, I know; a while back I asked if Mitt Romney was going to be Israel’s puppet. This was NOT intended to be a Anti-Semitic statement. It was simply asking if Mitt Romney was going to be a Wilsonian Republican or not. Which I highly doubt to be the case. I could be wrong, but I highly doubt it. Anyone that took anything else away from what I wrote there, is either projecting or putting words in my mouth.
This is a common smear. Second of all, Scott tries to articulate a point that even though he thinks the Country of Israel and the Jewish are great; he simply has no use for the fact that Israel and America are friends and he accuses America of “worshiping” Israel. This being another Anti-Semite talking point.
Sorry Scott, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot say, “hey, I like Jewish people, it is their Country that sucks and it also sucks that America is their friend.” Here is that reason; Israel cannot be separated from her people and likewise, the people of Israel cannot be separated from their homeland. The Jewish people are Israel. Just like you cannot separate Jesus Christ from the Word, as Christ is the word — you cannot separate Israel from its people, because the people of Israel and its land — are Israel.
This is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to intellectualize standard grade Jewish hatred and hatred of Israel.
Let me also say this as well: This above that I quoted goes well beyond disagreeing with Wilsonian foreign policy. This is a straight up, unmitigated, hatred of a Country that has no other friends in the middle east. The problem is that Scott here tries to intellectualize his loathing of a people, who simply want to leave in peace in their own Country.
Let me also say this; yes, I know, I pulled my “I stand with Israel” flag down, it is explained in my sidebars here on my blog. This does not equate a hatred for Israel or its people at all. Just my dismay at American Jews, who treat Americans spitefully. This above, goes well beyond that; and this is why I am pointing it out. The American Conservative is not just an Anti-Wilsonian foreign policy magazine; it is an anti-Israeli magazine and has been from the very start. Which is why I refuse to even link to it, except to write stuff like this here.
This above is why the paleoconservative movement never went anywhere. Not only because its stance on foreign policy is totally unrealistic in this modern age of global threats. But also because of the plain blind hatred of Jews and Israel. This is why Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul never went anywhere with their Presidential ambitions; that is because Americans simply reject hate. This is also why the American Conservative’s readership is as small as it is. Because hate is just not popular anymore.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — The Federal Reserve announced plans to unleash more stimulus Thursday, in its third attempt at a controversial program to rev up the U.S. economy.
The policy, known as quantitative easing and often abbreviated as QE3, entails buying $40 billion in mortgage-backed securities each month. The end date remains up in the air, as the Fed will re-evaluate the strength of the economy in coming months.
The Fed is wasting no time. The purchases begin Friday and are expected to add up to only $23 billion for the remainder of September. The bond-buying policy “should put downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative,” the Fed’s official statement said.
Meanwhile, the Fed will continue its existing policy known as Operation Twist. Together the two programs will add $85 billion in long-term bonds to the Fed’s balance sheet each month.
Now what effect will this have on our money supply?
Even less saving going on than is happening now. Why do the lending institutions need more liquidity? Because there are no real life loanable funds in the first place. No one is putting money in depository institutions, for example, because interest rates are at rock-bottom levels, but also because people have no excess money to save. So, the Fed is creating fake loanable funds through the purchase of the MBSs. Much of this will probably be newly-created money.
It will maintain the focus on consumer spending rather than investment. The idea is to keep people spending on real estate. Thus, less will be spent on business investment.
People will incur more debt.
We’ve heard for years from some incorrigible economists that what we need is the Fed to pump up the real estate market to get people spending again. Their answer is: more debt, more spending, less savings and investment.
This is what has been happening for years to no avail, of course, and the Fed is now just turning it up a notch. I’m sure recovery is right around the corner.
The definition of insanity/Keynesianism: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
A-farking-men. This is what happens, when you elect the same very idiots, who screwed the housing markets squarely into the ground. People that voted for this sort of Government, get exactly what is coming to them and the sort of Government that they voted for. Who the heck ever heard of printing money, that you do not even have to print? It is the textbook case of utter insanity.
I will say this; if Mitt Romney loses this election and the way recent events have turned out, he just might lose —- and this Nation goes into the crapper, because Conservatives and the Republican Party decided to pick a safe candidate. Then the Republican Party should be shut down for good and a new Conservative Party formed. Others have said it, I know and they are absolutely correct.
This stuff right here is the very reason why I hung it up with the Democratic Party and stopped voting for them and supporting them. I am not a millionaire or even someone with any sort of money at all. Hell, I have been unemployed for 8 damned years. However, I do know stupidity, when it see it; and it is on full display here. Only insane people would do stuff like this, and try to rev up the economy. The solution is to let the free-market work and do its job, not stick a statist finger in it.
Also too; as much as I am not a big fan of weaving ads into my blog postings. I believe this one is important. This would be a good time as any to get into Gold, Silver and other metals. I deal with two companies that sell the stuff. Their banners are below and they both come highly recommended.
They are:
and…:
Current Prices:
It would be absoutely insane not to get into at least some sort of Gold or other precious metal investment.
This is not much of s surprise at all, after all; Obama basically conceded defeat on the economy, of which Romney reminded everyone.
Quoting:
A majority of voters believe the country is worse off today than it was four years ago and that President Obama does not deserve reelection, according to a new poll for The Hill.
Fifty-two percent of likely voters say the nation is in “worse condition” now than in September 2008, while 54 percent say Obama does not deserve reelection based solely on his job performance.
Only 31 percent of voters believe the nation is in “better condition,” while 15 percent say it is “about the same,” the poll found. Just 40 percent of voters said Obama deserves reelection.
I remember back when Obama was trying to pass healthcare. I remember thinking at the time; “Why is he doing this? Why isn’t he trying to fix the economy first?” I also remember thinking, if he does this backwards like this, he is going to lose the people. Sure enough, I was right. Now, as a Conservative; I know darned well, that the President cannot actually fix the economy. However, what a President can do is create a climate of confidence, that will make small business owners want to hire people. Like reducing taxes, removing unnecessary red tape and regulations.
Another reason why Obama has ruined the business climate in America is because of spending. Now this is where I go off yowling and sounding like a Ron Paul follower, which I am really not; but the guy does have a point about this subject. I will explain it again for the 500’th time. When America spends money, it usually means that it prints more money, so that it can spend it. What this does is devalue our currency, when the currency is devalued, it costs more to buy products. This is called inflation, it was a problem in the 1970’s and it is now a problem again. To it’s credit, the United States brought it’s inflation problem under control in the 1980’s and because of that, the 1980’s was a time a great prosperity in this Country, this continued into the 1990’s as well.
Then the spending started again, under Clinton, and then, under Bush and now again under Obama. This is why we are in the spot that we are in, is because of the reckless spending by the Bush Administration on wars and also because of the Obama Administration’s strange idea that you can spend yourself out of a recession, which is quite idiotic.
Again, this is why that there are no jobs. Because when the Government spends, it puts the private sector at disadvantage. Now, if you are a Marxist and believe that the Government is the end all for everything, you like this. However, if you are a person that believes in limited Government, and that capitalism and private industry is the backbone of America; this, to you, is a very bad thing.
Another thing too, and I mentioned this earlier in my piece and that is taxes. It is my understanding that businesses taxes under Obama have increased. No matter what form that they might take, tax increases on businesses of any sort, small, large, medium —whatever, are a death knell to business growth. It only stands to reason that if a business owner is going to have to pay more taxes, that he is not going to be able to hire that extra employee. This is just common sense.
Which is something that is sorely lacking in the Democratic Party these days.
It seems that Jonathan S. Tobin, is not too happy that someone dared to tip a sacred now and actually write something critical of Ronald Wilson Reagan.
Check it out, the first paragraph:
There is a longstanding tradition on the political left to attack contemporary conservatives by comparing them to the right’s leaders in the past. That means that Republicans who were reviled by liberals during their lifetimes are sometimes treated kindly in retrospect because it serves the political purpose of diminishing the reputations of their successors. But in some precincts of the left, bashing Ronald Reagan never goes out of style.
Here is where the irony is at, this Magazine will go out of its way to defend Ronald Reagan; but has absolutely no problem smearingRon Paul at all. However, considering whom this magazine caters to, this should not be a great surprise at all. However, the irony is not lost, not on this American Conservative. Again, let me clear; Ron Paul was not perfect and no saint, not in the least. However, when one posts complaints of smearing, when one’s publication smears a true-American patriot; one must be held accountable for those actions.
This is why Ron Paul is not the GOP’s candidate for President of the United States:
Rep. Ron Paul said GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s convention speech left him “very skeptical” that the country’s economic policies will change.
“The speech is what I would expect,” the Texas Republican said Friday on Bloomberg Television’s “In the Loop.” “I remain very, very skeptical of hearing anything that will change the course of history. We have a debt problem. We have a spending problem, but how many things did he list to cut?”
Not enough, he said. The former GOP presidential candidate said the “most disturbing” part of America’s fiscal problems is the Federal Reserve, which Romney did not focus on during his speech.
“There was no talk of the Federal Reserve,” said Paul, advocating the elimination of both the Fed and fixed interest rates. “As long as we have the concept,” he later added, “we will linger a long time because debt is a problem and no one is willing to face up to it and I certainly didn’t hear that last night.
Ron Paul; for all the good things about him, this is one of his many flaws — besides his unrealistic foreign policy —- is that he is just too ideologically rigid. The only way that Ron Paul and his many legion of fans would be happy, is if the Federal Reserve were closed, the military were dismantled and America went back to gold standard. Of course, all of those things are just unrealistic at best.
He followed up those remarks with this bit idiotic nonsense:
So what’s his take on the Republican Party?
“Well, it is not my party. I do not like politics at all,” Paul said. “I think both parties are Keynesian economists and support positions that I do not like. So, the party, in many ways is irrelevant.”
Which is precisely why Ron Paul will never be President of the United States of America or thankfully anything else in the Republican Party ever again. I mean, if the man cannot tell the difference between an Marxist and an Republican; then he needs to get the heck out politics for good. because it is quite obvious that he is not fit to serve in any sort of capacity.
Now, personally, I watched it; and I did not think that it was that overly horrible. Still just the same, Andrew rightfully does point out the following:
The tribute did make slight nods to Paul’s belief in sound money and his fight to audit the Federal Reserve. But it ignored Paul’s fight to end GOP sacred cows like the costly and futile War on Drugs; his fight to protect civil liberties from executive overreach like the PATRIOT Act; and his battle against an unsustainable foreign policy of “maintaining empire” and playing World Police.
The video also neglected to mention just how Paul would like to cut the deficit.
Instead of the mainstream Republicans’ supposedly “radical” plans to cut from future spending growth, Paul wants to slash budgets left and right… especially the GOP’s sacred-cow national defense. He wants to end all corporate tax loopholes; something the GOP is reluctant to touch. He considers such “pro-business” tax manipulation to be synonymous with crony capitalism.
[….]
The GOP must have thought this video could placate Paul supporters enough to get their vote. Plenty of Republican officials expressed certainty that the Texas congressman will leave the convention fully endorsing the Romney/Ryan ticket. Despite Paul telling Fox’s Neil Cavuto that he has “no plans” to endorse, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said she is certain he will hop on the bandwagon.
But that’s just haughty. And wrong. Because until the party actually tries to change instead of occasionally throwing a superficial bone to Paul, then you can expect many of his supporters to maintain a firm position of “not voting for Romney.”
Want proof? Look to the little-reported fact that Paul’s delegates staged a walk-out immediately following the tribute video.
They walked out, and will likely continue to walk out, because the difference between Paul’s following and the GOP’s rank-and-file “Ew, it’s Romney, but we must support him” types is that the former truly believe in consistency and principles, and are wholly interested in maintaining it, while the latter seem blind in their belief that this Romney/Ryan ticket will somehow “save” the country while shutting out the the voices of actual change.
All very valid points, but I do tend to believe, that If I know Ron Paul like I think I do — he most likely is happy that he got any sort of a tribute at all and that his Son Rand is being accepted among the GOP mainstream. The reason I say this is because it was not too long ago that the GOP was headlong into President Bush’s Neoconservative nonsense and people like Ron Paul could not get a word in edgewise, much less a tribute from the GOP. So, I would say that Ron Paul is happy that his message has been accepted this much.
As for Romney my feelings are this here: As some of you might know, I have decided to cast my lot with Mitt Romney. I came to this decision last night, after watching the behavior of the left, when it came to Mia Love and Ann Romney; I mean sometimes, one must say, enough is enough and that I did and I have no regrets at all. I do have some doubts about Romney, but at this point; anything is better than Barack Obama. I mean, the man has been a horrible failure in many areas, even though I did not vote for Obama. I did kind of expect some sort of result from him. However, myself and many others like me in this position — got nothing.
So, I am in for Romney — come hell, high water and hacked blog. I am voting for something who will actually change things — for the good.
